Tuesday, September 27, 2011

More on the Early California Rainy Season

Of course, the problem is the extremely persistent high pressure system over the central United States that is causing Texas' record drought and fire season. There is no sign of significant change in that high for the next ten days.

2 comments:

This isn't a response to this particular post, but it is your most recent so it is where I will say it: you had found a new follower in me several weeks ago (when Andrew Sullivan linked to you), but you've since lost my attention following your derisions against those you like to call the "climate change" crowd.

I more-or-less agree with your criticisms of global warming activists but, as a member of the scientific, meteorological community like yourself, I cannot bear to read such blanket ridicule minus any recognition without feeling repulsed myself.

It is right enough to provide nuance to a complex issue, but you fail to do this. It seems you prefer to sink the whole ship rather than provide a delicate criticism. I'm sorry that you find the science of climatology to be so removed from reality that you prefer 98% of it be disregarded altogether.

@1:48am. Normally, I delete off-topic comments but I'll make an exception in this case because you give me a chance to make an important point:

Fifteen years ago I would not be treating climate science the way I do now. The data seemed to be supporting their (the Al Gore crowd) hypothesis.

However, for the last 13 years, world atmospheric temperatures, ocean heat content, hurricane trends, etc., are all far below what was predicted. Yet, we do not receive 1) science-based explanations or 2) humble, "we don't know everything and we are trying to figure it out" answers. Instead, we get more and more strident "science is settled" assertions and scientific nonsense. So, yes, 98% of the high-visibility Gore-related climate science should be disregarded. Note: I'm not saying ALL climate science should be disregarded.

Climategate proved (yes, proved) that some of the biggest names in climate science were engaged in unethical conduct to "game" climate science by blocking the publication of worthy papers with differing views . One was writing one thing in public ("warming incontrovertible"!) yet, simultaneously, writing [in what they thought would be private], "it is a travesty that we can't account for the lack of warming."

Finally, in order to be "science", there MUST be a falsifiable hypothesis. As long as global warming is responsible for cold, hot, drought, flood, storms, and "shrinking insects" (in the news yesterday); climate science gets farther and farther away from true "science."

There are true scientists working away (without publicity) who are ethical and trying to do good work. I respect them.

But, as temperatures and ocean heat continue to defy their forecasts and remain stagnant, peoples' skepticism toward the Al Gore crowd is fully justified and should only grow.

Unfortunately, the media reporting on global warming is more biased than any other subject of my lifetime. So, I try to provide some balance. Sorry this disappoints you.

I do appreciate your concerns and appreciate you taking the time to let me know.